• DB@mstdn.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    @GottaLaff@mastodon.social That is a very good question - the Human Subject Research regulations prohibit that

  • abracadabra holmes@mastodon.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    @GottaLaff@mastodon.social
    I think the FDA is ill equipped to be the Tech Admin.

    Their answer should have been “umm no. You’re thousands of living monkeys away from human testing”

      • Matthew Loxton@med-mastodon.com
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        @GottaLaff@mastodon.social
        I think I know the answer to the main question, and it is a bit boring.

        I expect that Neuralink got approval for human testing because they used a “same as” application, and could cite many other very similar implants that had been previously approved for other applicants. (2002, 2006, etc)

        I want to know how this patient selected, the end points, what is this “issue” that the patient mentioned, what outcomes and adverse effects are being monitored, what are the rollback options?